This is what I’m talking about: MPLP = Archives 2.0
I have the advantage over you because I’ve already read the post that will follow this one–Dan Santamaria guest blogging about MPLP. I wish I had had this post to read even earlier, back before I prepared my brief “Archives 2.0: An Introduction” presentation for my session at SAA. I don’t know if I would have changed the slides to reference what Dan is talking about, but I certainly would have used MPLP to support the concept that Archives 2.0 is not “Archives + Web 2.0.” If you look at the list of qualities that characterize Archives 2.0 on my third slide–things like “user-centered,” “open to iterating products,” and “innovation and flexibility”–I think you can see that they are very much in line with what Dan is talking about. I think in an earlier version of my presentation, I had characterized “Archives 1.0″ as risk averse, and Archives 2.0 as more willing to take risks, and this is something that I will definitely put back in as I revise these slides. When Dan cites examples of archives “using resources creatively in order to increase access to collections,” I would argue what he’s really talking about is something broader than processing, and it is this kind of evolution and approach that I am calling Archives 2.0. Concepts like considering resource allocation in relation to processing, developing a policy for what constitutes acceptable baseline access for all collections, and incorporating the means to collect metrics on the use of collections to guide further processing are all signs of increased professionalization and sophistication of the archival world that I think translate into a new “version” of our profession.
In my presentation I said that Archives 2.0 isn’t something that’s “in the future”–it’s here now. Our profession has changed. For me and many others, we recognize what’s happened and think it’s a good thing. I suspect for some of our colleagues, this may be a very confusing time. The profession they started their careers in and became expert at has changed underneath their feet. Things are different or changing and they’re not sure why or whether or not they like it. Some people may think their expertise is no longer valued, and that the stable future they had envisioned for the end of their careers has changed into a shifting, murky landscape. I don’t know if any of these factors account for the negative reactions to MPLP, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they were a subconscious factor for some people.
I hadn’t intended this post to turn into one about change management, but that’s how it is ending up. If you’re reading this, you’re probably one of the people who is excited by change, but you may also know some colleagues who are not. As we think about things like MPLP and other examples of how the profession is changing the way it does business, it might be useful to remember some basic change management principles as well. Perhaps I’ll be able to find a guest blogger for that sometime soon too. And now, here’s Dan . . . .
Archival description & finding aids, Archives 2.0, Organizational change | Kate T. | 
August 21, 2009 8:07 am
1 Comment
Other Links to this Post
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Subscribe
By Bill Landis, August 25, 2009 @ 6:48 pm
But turn into ruminations on change management it did, and your comments are right on the mark, I think! What a great framework you’ve articulated for thinking about managing change at the professional level.